Social Feeds

Automakers could slash costs of electric cars by the 2015 model year with a battery chemistry breakthrough from start-up tech company Envia Systems. The company claims its breakthrough boosts lithium-ion battery density from a current level in the 110-140 watt-hours/kilogram range to well past 400 watt-hours/kilogram (Wh/kg). This would lower the cost of battery-powered transportation from about $350 to $500 per kilowatt-hour, currently; to as little as $125 to $150 per kilowatt-hour, as measured at the cell level rather than the pack level, says company chairman and CEO Atul Kapadia.Envia will release details of independent testing of its cells this week. The Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Electromechanical Power Systems Department in Crane, Indiana, tested Envia’s cells, conducted at various cycling rates. NSWC confirmed an energy density between 378 and 418 Wh/kg for a 45 Amp-hour cell.“Our battery materials are low-cost, and they have the stability that automotive applications demand,” says Envia’s chief technology officer and co-founder, Sujeet Kumar.What does this mean for you? General Motors has said the first order of business in its constant improvement program for the Voltec extended-range electric technology is to cut cost. This implies future model year Volts will have lower sticker prices more in keeping with the Chevy brand.Envia’s announcement is taking the electric car business by surprise, and a GM spokesman was unable to comment on whether, or when, the company might have tested the new cell chemistry in Voltec battery packs.GM’s newly appointed chief technology officer, Jon Lauckner, is a member of Envia’s board. In Lauckner’s role as president of GM Ventures, which invests in new automotive technologies, GM kicked in $17 million to develop the cathode component of the new technology. Envia also handled the anode, electrolyte and cell density components of the breakthrough, while working with an outside supplier on the separator.

[caption id="attachment_21421" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Envia says its higher energy density battery will reduce the number of cells needed for an electric vehicle by nearly half and dramatically reduce the overall cost. "][/caption]Envia began work on the lithium-ion chemistry about four-and-a-half years ago, and unnamed automakers began testing the batteries in cars about mid-2010, according to the company. Saleable electric vehicles could be on the road within 24 months, or in time for the 2015 model year, when Envia says the cost per mile of a vehicle using its technology will reach parity with the cost per mile of a conventional gas-powered internal combustion engine. Kapadia says the NSCW testing proves the two have parity today. It’s only a matter of time before the technology is ready for production.What’s the nature of Envia’s breakthrough?“Lithium-ion cell designs are pretty much the same,” Kumar says. “It’s what’s inside the cell that matters. We’ve changed the material inside the cells. “ They consist of high-capacity silicon-carbon anodes and lithium-rich layered cathodes."The cells don’t require significantly higher or lower temperatures, nor do they use any expensive, rare earth materials.Technical Editor Kim Reynolds lists many caveats. For instance, Envia says its 80-percent cycle-life is “over 500 cycles,” which to Kim seems far below the number of cycles a customer would expect from 10 years of ownership.I’ll leave it to Kim, who has just attended a Society of Automotive Engineers symposium on battery electric vehicle technology, and Technical Director Frank Markus to closely go over the details.For now, let’s just say that Envia’s energy density claim of 400 Wh/kg+ has raised techies’ eyebrows, including Kim's and Frank's. As a political issue, Envia CEO Kapadia and CTO Kumar say their Newark, California-based company’s breakthrough will push U.S. battery technology to the lead in a race with Japan and South Korea. Let’s hope this breakthrough proves as big as it sounds.

It sounds like you have a slipping clutch, but you may want to figure
out if it slipping for some reason other than being worn out. You should check
to make sure that the basket doesn’t have something built up between it and the
tub. If you want to see a video on how to replace the clutch, here’s a good on
on

Sorry Steven - it's been a bit busy. Yes the technology can be used for cell phones but there is simply no bandwidth for my company to do so right now. Our entire focus is on making electric car mass market real.

A much-improved battery would greatly improve the Volt and the Prius and make them more viable options (improved design, performance, and cost) against cars powered solely by ICEs. A "perfect" battery--one that is reasonably priced and has the energy density of gasoline and that has an 80-percent cycle life that is >2000 charges--would make all hybrids obsolete, including the Prius. Sure you could build better and better versions of these cars than ever before. But if the batteries were so good, you would want to go full electric.
It sounds that Envia's technology is good enough to make what is possible with the next-generation versions of the Prius and Volt much better than before. But I don't think they are yet anywhere near the place where full electric is the way to go.

What a bunch of BS, I don't know anyone that thinks a more expensive car will out sell a less expensive vehicle. A lower cost Volt will reach more of us that would never pay for the cost of one right now. Many of these Volt owners are using very little gas and charging them is very cheap. I wish I could afford a Volt!

A very significantly lower priced battery would doom the Volt, not help it. The Volt makes sense (if at all)
only in a world of very expensive batteries. Very cheap batteries usher in all electric vehicles, which don't carry the baggage and costs of the gas powered engine drive train that currently occupies so much space and makes the Volt too costly to compete, even with $7500 Federal subsidies. GM has invested in a technology that will completely kill its $2.5 billion Volt. All at a cost of a mere $17 million. And people wonder why GM went bankrupt. The Volt has been a disaster in the marketplace.

I took a close look at the website, there are something really interesting there, hopefully you folks can continue to improve the cycling, maybe >3000 cycles at 80% DOD. The automotive market is difficult and there are many many engineer challenges to be solved before any automaker will put this type of battery in their cars.
The finicky customer, expensive lawsuit, bad political atomsphere and many technical difficulties are ahead of you. BTW, are the CTO called Sujeet?

Iny - I had promised myself that I would not respond to rants - but General Motors had nothing to do with this 400 Wh/kg technology. They are investors and supporters of these basic development. But this is all developed by the entrepreneurial and hard-working spirit of my engineering team - something that transcends party affiliation. And the 400 Wh/kg technology has nothing to do with the Volt.

They do no have an exclusive right of use for the 400 Wh/kg battery - but working with large automotive OEMs eventually there will be certain compromises (remember, we are still a 36 people company). Don't know what form they will take yet - right now we are just qualifying and developing different battery components for all these OEMs.

I'm all for whatever cost-effective measures help me lower driving costs. I'm more interested in better hybrids from battery tech though vs pure electric. I'd love to see a small SUV achieve 50 MPG highway thanks to a better battery system assisting the ICE motor.

This hardly make Batterys seem like a good ideal. Its still crazy to replace it if it dies in your car. Until the cost of replacing a 10 year old battery from a dealer drops like a rock there will never be much of a market for this kind of car.

"Also one needs to point out conservative nature in automotive application will only allow you to use 60%(maybe 70%) to ensure longevity,"
Not sure where you get that from. Nissan Leaf uses much more than 70%. So do all other current & upcoming EVs - Mitsu i, Tesla S, BMW i3 etc. In general 80% is a good number for EVs.
Hybrids is a different matter. They have small batteries optimized for power density. They are cycled a lot of times in a very narrow band to increase longevity.

As a city-dweller in a densely populated area, a 200 mile charge vehicle would be enough to meet my current driving needs for a week. At 1000 charges, that would be enough juice to keep me going for 19 years charging once a week. I am far from knowledgeable about batteries, but the concept of electric cars has always intrigued me. The biggest thing to me is the possible lower vehicle maitenance. Hypothetically speaking, would there be any degradation of charge as time passes? For example, assuming the battery was properly maintenanced with charging and discharging, would the ability to hold at least 80% of its charge drop. I am assuming yes, but what kind of degradation would we be looking at after 10-12 years, assuming minimal charging?
Too bad liquid batteries aren't really viable in terms of weight and energy density. It would be an easier sale knowing that one could go into an electron exchange/gas station and get a refill on energy than having to worry about range anxiety and charging daily (which isn't really that big of a deal to people like me with limited daily drives).

Electric cars are great & useful choice now-a-days. As we are raising our voice & showing our concern for the rapidly increasing oil prices, we can find some relief by using electric cars.
Thanks for sharing this!

I noticed the cycling data of the pouch cell is tested at 80% DOD, the longevity is NOT that impressive, also do you claim 400 Wh/Kg at 80% DOD or 100% DOD? The initial capacity drop is due to test at various rate? also the capacity fading of the pouch seems to accelerate after 370 cycles.Also what about volumetric energy density Wh/L?
I am still quite impressed with the performance, maybe the DOD% needs to be dropped further (so is the EV range) in order to ensure excellent longevity. Of course that somehow undercut the advantage of very high energy density.
Toyota is using Sanyo's 20.5Ah with an energy density of 125 Wh/Kg (for people unfamiliar with battery technology, Sanyo dropped the energy density from about 220 Wh/kg to 125 Wh/kg in order to achieve longevity) , they claim 10,000 cycles, I estimated the DOD% to be around 70%.Of course Sanyo's design is aimed at PHEV, which requires a different design philosophy than EV. Hopefully Envia's technology can bring EV with 200 miles to the general public!
Hopefully you guys become a battery company, not a material company! All the best (gotta go shopping now for dinner)

MoH
Good point on the Si-anode. That's why we don't use a pure-play Si-based anode to just increase capacity and claim outrageously large numbers that are not relevant. You need to take into account loading levels, swelling and what not when you use Silicon. We developed our own Si-C composite anode - that took several iterations and several parallel approaches before we honed in on a particular approach.
Last but not least, we only tapped as much capacity out of the anode (to trade-off with cycle life and other parameters) such that it extracts the best out of our cathode. Cell is not made up of isolated components - it has to be finely balanced electrochemical system.
If you are in defense, note where we got out cells tested.

In terms of longevity, is Si based anode good for that? My understanding is SONY only use Si based anode for their camcorder business, where energy density is important and longevity is NOT!
I respect any honest and hard-working individual in the battery community and my posting is not meant to offend people, but there are just too many cheaters!!! Sadoway, Cui, Amprius, Prieto, Sakti3 and hundreds more!
That is why I left this industry and now in defense sector!

Questions:
1). Gassing problem solved? Large irreversible capacity loss in 1st cycle solved? What kind of powder density when cell has 350-400 wh/Kg energy density? 500W/kg or 5000W/Kg?
2). 1000 cycles? you know that people tends to have the cells charged whenever they can, so when your cells are fully charged and stay there for long time, does that degrade the cell performance due to its high voltage?
3). 300 miles? Assume the actual energy density is 300 wh/kg (which is really breathtaking), and cycled at 70%, your cell pack have an available energy at >80Kwh (remember 4 mile per Kwh applies only to curb weight probably less than 2500lb), total energy >110 Kwh), your battery weight is >800lb, with BMS, TMS, etc, the weight is likely> 1400 lb, that is a big challenge in automotive design.
4). If all the claims are right and meet automotive requirement, realistically we are talking about an EV with 150-200 miles range, and that is the probably the best you can get.
ex-Ford employee!

We have been one of the most cash-efficient battery start-ups out there. Over the past 4.5 years, we have raised $28M and have most of our publicly announced Series C (December 2010) funds still in our bank. Envia is not raising any capital. This announcement is a reflection of our enthusiasm that an affordable 300-mile electric car will be real in our foreseeable future. In addition, Envia wants to dispel doubts being created by Li-ion skeptics that Li-ion does not have the juice to get us to an affordable 300-mile electric car.

You are right about the fact that Mn-based chemistry has gassing problems. So has been the case for all the chemistries used in today's electric drive cars also. But Mn-problems can be solved by a variety of techniques - changing certain surface properties of cathode, electrolyte optimization and some specific cell design techniques to minimize the gassing. The cells would not cycle for this long if gassing was not being "managed" in the electrochemical system.
We could not agree with you more on your experience and your skepticism of battery claims. That is precisely why we made real cells - 45 Ah - pouch cells and got it tested with a 3rd party (NSWC). We are skeptical when we see claims of energy density in small form factor and small rated cells without much cycling information.
Agreed - be mindful of the hype and only believe it when it is a real cell.

Please note that the cells have cycled 400 times in our labs and are still cycling. Cells have also been sent to NSWC for cycle tests. The important thing is to first reach the energy density and then continue to improve cycle life. If cycle life was less then 20 cycles, one could make an argument that there is a science issue. At this point, having cycled over 400 times and still cycling - engineering work will be needed to increase cycle life.
Also note, number of cycles as cited in USABC manual for electric cars is a 1000 cycles. For a 300 mile car, if you cycle all the way 1000 times, you get 300 * 1000 = 300,000 miles.

There are some merits in the claim, such as high energy density, and lower price. At the same time, their cells tend to have gassing problem, especially when they are hot (not sure if they solved the problem, Suggest Motor Trend ask them about it), which is bad because most automotive batteries are flat cells, not cylindrical, so durability can be an issue. Also one needs to point out conservative nature in automotive application will only allow you to use 60%(maybe 70%) to ensure longevity, so if you can use 200-250 Wh/Kg, that will be great!
Haven been in this industry for 10y and R&D for 15y, let me tell you: >95% battery breakthrough claim are nothing but hyped hoopla whose only purpose is to get government or foolish VC's money (Silicon battery, virus battery, solid-state battery............. the list is long). With so much $$$ flying around, there are way too many swindlers around, in fact, when you present any good work to experienced people, you will get lots of doubts/suspicion because we all know people's integrity is gone when big claim can land you $$$, where honest assessment can send you to unemployment!

Right-wingers hating on American manufacturing companies.
What's next, a Republican campaign to buy Chinese?
That would go well with the current call for Americans to not send their children to college. Let China and India produce the educated people and we can look forward to living in company dorms and eating a bowl of rice three times a day.

I disagree with both you and Ramon, because these improvements in density and cost aren't enough to cross the cost parity and ease of use parity over ice/hybrid/plug in hybrid cars. Both have to be factored in. ICE car ranges are anywhere from 250-800 mi/tank, but they can be refilled in 10 min, while the best ev gets just 260 mi/full charge and require 6-12hrs for full charge. Hybrids are 25-35% and ev's are 50-80% price premiums over comparable cars. The numbers above will either improve the range to desireable levels but keep prices high or lower prices to equal with ICE cars with small ranges. Until ev's get 500 mi range at equal or below ICE car prices, or 300 mile range with 15 min full recharges, they will never see widespread adoption.